The Aluminum Extruders Council (AEC) has led the U.S. aluminum extrusion industry in achieving level competition by winning tariff protection that offsets unfair trade practices of extruders/importers of aluminum profiles produced in China. Our efforts have been of enormous value to domestic extruders and suppliers. Conservatively, an estimated 800 million pounds per year of extrusions are being produced in the U. S. that would have otherwise been lost to China.

Search This Blog

2018 Year End Update

In the last few weeks we have advanced several open issues important to our trade case against China. Meanwhile, critical macro-political issues remain open and pose risks to our market in 2019. Let’s first discuss our case.

The Seventh Administrative Review is underway. Preliminary results are expected in late January 2019. The AEC withdrew its requests for mandatory respondents in October. The Department of Commerce (DOC) will be selecting respondents in December. Given the history of reviews in recent years, there is a high likelihood that no respondents will come forward and rates will remain as they are today: 80% on the dumping case and 26% for the subsidy case.

Scope issues continue to be the most active legal element of our orders. Working with Endura Products, we continue to push the DOC for a decision in the door threshold cases. We are waiting for the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to announce the date of the curtain wall appeal. Also, briefings have been filed in the 5050 appeals. The hearing could take place as early as December.

Trade enforcement is our main area of focus, based on membership requests. There are two active Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) filings we are working. One is our Malaysia case and the other is Endura’s threshold case. Decisions from the Department of Customs are due by the end of the year, Q1 at the latest. We continue to get new reports from our investigative team. These will be filed as further facts come into focus. A few weeks ago we sat down with the DOC to discuss our circumvention case against Vietnam. We pressed them to make a preliminary decision (at least) on our case. They seemed favorable to our request. I will be following up with our attorneys in this matter in December to find ways to keep the pressure on the government.

Both the 232 duties involving the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) countries and the RUSAL sanctions remain open issues. The Aluminum Association is working the 232 issue hard in D.C. They have requested AEC member involvement in persuading the Trump Administration in dropping the tariffs on Canadian and Mexican aluminum product imports. The AEC recently sent a survey to members asking them if they approve or disapprove of the AEC getting involved in the issue, and how strongly they feel about their position. The results: 59 respondents support the AEC being involved, while 61 oppose. However, those that support the AEC’s involvement felt much stronger about their position, on a scale from 1 to 10, with a score of 7.9 vs. a 3.3 score by those that oppose. The Fair Trade Committee will need to decide how to proceed based on this feedback. The RUSAL issue is to be decided by the administration on December 12, 2018, baring another extension. In October, The Department of Treasury gave permission to U.S. firms to enter 2019 agreements with RUSAL. However, there is no surety of supply. With premiums cooling from their mid-2018 highs, the biggest risks to the market seems to be rising premiums, and the cost of alumina.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Well, our year is off and running with a bang. Scope issues, Administrative Review, and circumvention top our list in early 2018.

This month we learned that there will be an appeal in the curtain wall scope case. Permasteelisa and Jangho filed a notice of appeal last week. It is expected that Yuanda will almost surely file their own notice of appeal by the deadline, which is February 12. The Chinese industry signaled that they would appeal in a recent article in US Glass magazine.

Additionally, our scope challenge related to door thresholds continues to move forward. This is a significant case because door thresholds are expressly mentioned as subject merchandise in our trade orders. So, to lose this application could open the door to many applications clearly covered by our case. Finally, we continue to await the judges’ (there are more than one judge at the CIT) decision in the appliance handles cases we defended last fall. We believe we will win. However, we are mostly i…

Our 6th Annual Administrative Review results have been announced. As previously reported, the Department of Commerce (DOC) maintained extrusion tariffs at 86.01% for our subsidy, or countervailing duty (CVD), case and 20% for our anti-dumping (AD) case. The combined duty of 106% has been stable since 2016. This is a good number for the industry, which continues to contain Chinese aluminum extrusion at less than 1% market share. Furthermore, the DOC also assigned the Adverse Facts Available (AFA) rate of 198.61% to the two mandatory respondents, Liaoning Zhongwang Group Co., Ltd. and Liaoyang Zhongwang Aluminum Profile Co. Ltd., which has been the AFA rate since the 5th review. The 7th Annual Administrative Review has begun with the selection of mandatory respondents.

Elsewhere in our case, there is nothing new to report on the scope issues we are battling. We continue to wait for court dates or decisions depending on the matter. Our trade enforcement actions and results have ma…

It’s sometimes hard to remember that the AEC has a trade case against China. With all of the news regarding the 232 Investigation, the Russian Sanctions, and the fallout we’ve experienced, I find myself having to leave tasks on my calendar to be sure I am dialed into the ins and outs of our anti-dumping/countervailing duties (AD/CVD) cases. When I do review the cases and get dialed in again, I am quite happy with how it’s going.

That’s because our initiatives are starting to gain traction. Take, for example, our Vietnam Circumvention case. The deadline for filing briefs in this matter has come and gone with no reply from the other side. Therefore, we are in a strong position to ask the Department of Commerce for their preliminary ruling so that duties can be applied at once. The final ruling in this matter is due December 24, 2018. However, the sooner we can get to a preliminary decision, the better for our domestic industry. There will be more to come on this in the coming we…